Why is this a problem? They also get less child benefit for subsequent children, on the grounds that childcare material is reusable. You don't need to make your property safe twice for two disabled kids.

Technically, I don't think children belong to 'parents'. Recently the talking heads determined they belong to the community as a whole. Thus, if the State or local Government said one of your kids qualifies and another doesn't .... then you should follow thier quidelines.

I suspect a computer or a claims rep discarded one of the applications as duplicate. It happens. And less likely although still possible, it may be that the system hasn't performed the correct application standardizations.On the plus side, the U.S. system is currently undergoing or has undergone standardization and uniforms entry and acceptance requirements to prevent exactly this type of thing from occuring, both cases, including review of rejections.I have two good friends who were twins and orphans. They therefore received U.S. social security orphans benefits. However, the initial application for one was rejected as a duplicate. Then it was discovered that the social security computer database at the time couldn't handle two people with the same birthday, address, and last name and kept throwing up errors. Thus one was classified as adult disabled and the other as an orphan. The one listed as adult disabled got some funny looks when many years later the company he worked for did a background check for security clearance. Good times...

Odd. FWIW, though, the mother isn't quite right about them being assessed separately rather than as twins - the caseworker can consider whether the resources being used for one child can be shared (nobody needs two disabled ramps, for example) as part of their assessment.

nitefallz:Are the parents brother and sister or something? All the kids have severe medical issues.

The identical twin boys have the same issues, I don't see anything indicating the other kids are sick.

already have 3 kids you cant afford ? best plan of action, have some more, and dont bother to abort the twin downies, more benefits !! man these people suck ! stop having kids you cant afford people !!!

Mimic_Octopus:already have 3 kids you cant afford ? best plan of action, have some more, and dont bother to abort the twin downies, more benefits !! man these people suck ! stop having kids you cant afford people !!!

How the hell do you know they can't afford the kids? DLA is a standalone benefit, you get it if you're disabled, not poor

WrathofDog:I suspect a computer or a claims rep discarded one of the applications as duplicate. It happens. And less likely although still possible, it may be that the system hasn't performed the correct application standardizations.On the plus side, the U.S. system is currently undergoing or has undergone standardization and uniforms entry and acceptance requirements to prevent exactly this type of thing from occuring, both cases, including review of rejections.I have two good friends who were twins and orphans. They therefore received U.S. social security orphans benefits. However, the initial application for one was rejected as a duplicate. Then it was discovered that the social security computer database at the time couldn't handle two people with the same birthday, address, and last name and kept throwing up errors. Thus one was classified as adult disabled and the other as an orphan. The one listed as adult disabled got some funny looks when many years later the company he worked for did a background check for security clearance. Good times...

It does sound like that upper level managers are looking into the situation as well... Hum. Mayhap the outrage is a tad early.

FarkinNortherner:Odd. FWIW, though, the mother isn't quite right about them being assessed separately rather than as twins - the caseworker can consider whether the resources being used for one child can be shared (nobody needs two disabled ramps, for example) as part of their assessment.

nitefallz: Are the parents brother and sister or something? All the kids have severe medical issues.

The identical twin boys have the same issues, I don't see anything indicating the other kids are sick.

netcentric:Technically, I don't think children belong to 'parents'. Recently the talking heads determined they belong to the community as a whole. Thus, if the State or local Government said one of your kids qualifies and another doesn't .... then you should follow thier quidelines.

They know what is best for your family. Not you.

You're right. The state should just write them a blank check. The parents will know how best to spend the state's money. Not the state.

I can think of one possibility why the 2nd boy might have been refused. Maybe it's a family allowance. For instance, I daresay the parents would hire just one nurse who would care for both boys. If true, then they're playing the media outrage for all it's worth that they were told they couldn't double dip.

On the other hand, some consumables couldn't be shared; each boy will have to undergo his own medical tests, etc.

A compromise figure of 1.5x or something would seem to be in order. (I'd be astonished that this has never come up before, though... a family trying to claim two allowances.)

Let me guess... they were trying again for a girl and got this double-bonus instead.

Would they have stopped at 2 kids if one had been a girl? Its sad but if letting parents select for gender will in the end reduce total population, I'm beginning to be all for it.

/& those two are not going to be little, cute, and relatively easy to handle forever... A woman who works at my local municipality had a cute little 'Downs' son many years ago. Now the guy is huge, outweighs her and is depressingly hard to handle.I see her hanging around long after her work-day is over; I strongly suspect she hates going home. Sad.